My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-18-2010 CCM
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
10-18-2010 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2010 11:55:36 AM
Creation date
11/2/2010 11:55:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
10/18/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />Ciry Council Minutes <br />October 18, 2010 <br />B. Private Wells for Domestic Use <br />Page 5 <br />Attorney Beck presented the staff report and noted there is an alternative ordinance in <br />the packet that would regulate private wells on properties in the urban service district. <br />He stated the concern of the Utilities Commission is to protect the integrity of the water <br />system and to protect the aquifer. <br />Utilities Commission Chair John Dietz -Asked the Council to adopt the alternate <br />version of the ordinance because the Utilities Commission hasn't reviewed the original <br />version which wouldn't grandfather in past wells. He expressed concerns with having to <br />increase water rates if the utility loses its large water customers to private wells (leaving <br />the single family homes to pay for it). He stated the Utility built a lot of infrastructure to <br />accommodate these water users and can't afford to lose them. <br />Councilmember Gumphrey expressed concerns with taxpayers having to pay for the <br />infrastructure. <br />Councilmember Zerwas and Westgaard concurred. <br />Councilmember Westgaard stated he also has concerns with government regulating <br />wells on private property. He noted the city's efforts may be better served through <br />educational campaigns. He stated he understands the intent of the ordinance but <br />believes we should find a different way to amend the ordinance so we are not regulating <br />people too much but are still able to maintain the infrastructure. <br />• <br />Attorney Beck clarified the differences between the ordinances. He stated that three- <br />fourths of the water infrastructure is for summer usage. <br />Councilmember Motin agreed with Councilmember Westgaard's comments. He <br />suggested looking at this as it relates to high impact users and suggested a further <br />review. <br />Dave Berg, Water Superintendent -Further noted contamination concerns with well <br />water. He discussed the financial concerns of the utility. <br />Mayor Klinzing stated she is not interested in regulating everyone in the city and felt the <br />focus should be on large water users. <br />Ms. Johnson clarified that the infrastructure is paid for by water users and not taxpayers. <br />She stated the demand for water use is what created the need for additional <br />infrastructure. <br />MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER GUMPHREY TO ADOPT THE <br />ALTERNATE VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE. Motion died for lack of a <br />second. <br />Councilmember Zerwas suggested removing the exceptions from the original version of <br />the ordinance and adding it to the alternate version. <br />Attorney Beck stated Section 78-26 (a) could have language added that refers to single <br />• family buildable lots. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.